Terminology in Hetalia
by Fomalhaut16
Summary: The way countries function, think and feel. After much thought, this is how I think they do.


**Disclaimer: Neither Hetalia nor its characters belong to me. Both are property of their respective author.**

 **I have to say that this is a little strange fanfic, which I came up with when I was reading the wikipedia in Arabic of Hetalia, where they had a category of terminologies. Strange, I know, but I hope you enjoy it.**

* * *

The Countries: they are, as it is about history mainly, the countries personified. Many people confuse their personification with a humanization of the same, believing that they are humans who represent countries but in reality, they are the personification in all its aspects of the countries and nations in themselves. Although they are seen as human people they are not. This is ironic since they exist thanks to the beliefs and traditions of people. The countries personified, (which is their central characteristic) are born from the strongest human ideas, from nationalisms, feelings of identification, cultures, ethnic groups and even languages. Many people think that they personify geographic locations but this, even though it has its truth, is wrong. A geographical region itself cannot have personification, because every personification carries an identity and identity is constructed by man. Countries are molded "physically" with the territory, but this does not define them as nations can change places if they wish and have the possibility. Only in very specific cases the personification is tied to the geography in which they live or were born.

The personifications of nations and countries to exist need a people to identify collectively, which makes the personification feel through it. People would be, individually, like the cells of a personified country. In masses, they shape their feelings, emotions and their heart figuratively speaking (the physical heart of a personification would come to be the capital of the country). In spite of this, personification usually does not act or make decisions based on their collective feelings (the people), but thinks and acts by what it says and does the State or Government, that would be their minds.

Nations may or may not kill each other or people of their own construction, only if they are at war, if ordered, or will deliberately bring them a profit, whether they want it or not.

It has been said that personified countries see the common people individually in the same way that one sees a flower. They see every moment of it indifferent and they're not distressed when it withers, because they know deliberately that they will again flourish and many more will.

When countries see enormous masses of people in demonstrations or large events they are often shocked as when one sees a field of flowers that follows towards the horizon.

Genres: if we speak literally, countries have both genders (reference to that in a country by logic there are both men and women), and at the same time they have none. Even so, they may prefer one with which to show themselves. In general, countries when they choose a genre do it indefinitely this means that they begin to act based on what is considered the behavior of such genre. Often this choice is made with respect to how patriarchal the culture in question has been.

Physical pain: nations feel pain and / or suffer physical harm when there is a struggle or war on their land. Natural or non-natural disasters also affect them.

President or King: the leader of the country. Countries have power, but they do not exercise themselves but their so-called "bosses." At first the nations saw and called them "advisers", but when they began to put themselves in positions of power with respect to the people, they began to call them "bosses", since they could not disobey them for fear of reprisals.

Countries can follow the feelings of their heart (the people), and reveal themselves against their leaders if their overthrow will mean the improvement of their situation. An example of this is Russia and his Revolution of 1917.

But usually, whether or not the country likes the boss, always ends up obeying him since the people, and everything else that conforms him do not rise against them. The personified country does not have autonomy or individual thought: does, thinks, feels and acts with respect to the people, the government and their own culture.

The presence of colds: this is a reference to when they are in an economic crisis. When one country infects another, it refers to the fact that economic crises in countries can affect the economy of others. Health countries always depend on their economic situation. And its mental sanity, their social situation.

Family: In the countries, families refer to countries with the same ethnicity, culture or cultural alliances with different similarities. Countries that derived from others, etc.

Mind and Heart of Countries: Countries often discuss opposing or ambivalent emotions and feelings between their "minds" and "hearts." The "mind" of countries represents their State or Government, while their "heart" represents the people, the people who conform them.

Marriages and commitments: the countries "marry" when they unite their kingdoms or countries through strong alliances. Examples of this are Austria and Hungary as the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Commitments arise between them when there are usually strategic alliances of some kind.

Marriage between countries should not be interpreted as a "merger". Usually marriage occurs when governments are united in one, without necessarily uniting languages and cultural. If this were to be done, it would be rather a unification of two nations, resulting in a new one.

Special relations: countries that are in "special relations" are countries that enjoy a strong economic, military, political and cultural, and historical union. Although mostly only military, economic and political. Examples of this are USA and England.

Children and Parents: Countries have "children" or "parents" when they were colonies and became independent, countries derived from others, or countries that separated from oneself. Examples of this are USA, Australia, New Zealand (children of England), or the Latin American countries (children of Spain). Although this rule is not always the same for all countries, being some just "younger brothers" or "cousins." Cases of this are Switzerland and Germany.

However, in countries or nations that are very old or simply old the question is different. So, who are the mothers or fathers of the countries, and who represent each one? The "mother" represents the culture, in all its aspects, and the "father", the way in which it can be managed or interpreted (political, administratively). The mother would be the _power_ and the father the _action_. Example: Gaul is mother of France (ethnically, culturally and geographically), and the Roman Empire is his father, not only because in the Roman way of thinking based on the Gallic culture is what France is now, but it was what caused this romanization on the Gallic peoples, such an association would be France.

There are times when these two aspects do not have to be separate, for example, Magyar (former Hungarian people), is both father and "mother" of Hungary because he would represent both aspects. It is not necessary for countries to have a mother and father separately. Other times they have it.

The role of father would be something more conceptual of the nation, and that of mother more culture and geography. Many times the function of the "father" has nothing to do with the "son" in question, they are only the cause of their existence as if they were consequences of something. Example England and the Roman Empire.

Growth: the physical appearance of the countries differs in terms of their chronological and biological age. Countries usually grow physically as they advance or become powerful or power kingdoms, even though they have a chronological age superior to their biological age appearance.

There are countries (example: Italy) that despite their long chronological age, spent almost all their life as a child, growing biologically only when it was unified in a Kingdom. However, there are others whose case is reversed (example, United States), where chronological age is below biological age (as a country), professing a fast growth.

With the exception of these cases, and to long-lived countries (China, Japan, India, etc.) or relatively new countries (American countries, etc.), the appearance or stages of countries and regions are generally divided as follows:

-Ancient Age: childhood

-High middle Ages: childhood-pre adolescence.

\- Low middle Ages: pre adolescence - adolescence.

\- Renaissance / Contemporary era: youth-adulthood.

Not to be confused with people: even though countries are personified, it is very clear that they are still not real human beings, being literally the countries themselves personified. This is an interesting question. The personifications of the countries, which are these in themselves, arise before a strong idea of nation, cultural, and differentiation. All that they are, it is thanks to the human being, therefore these when they are personified, and they look like such. The same countries are debated internally if the people suppose the Nation, or the Nation supposes the people. Finally it was concluded that both are correct. At first, logically, people assumed nations, cultures, languages, and beliefs. But already at this point, where such values are so overrated, people when they are born are already tied to what they must be under the conception of thought from where they were born, now assuming the nation to the bruises in which they will live, act and think such people.

Example: Western culture clearly emerged in the West after such events, and under certain conceptions of life, ethical and moral, religion, supposing people to these parameters, and thus assuming the structure of Western nations. But being this, the people who will be born under the western culture will already be predisposed to think like the structure of that culture, assuming now this factor on the people.

Therefore, countries and nations are supported by people, without them they would not exist, but at the same time they support themselves by molding people under their parameters.

Blood: Countries bleed by mouth when their people are massacred or killed by others or by themselves.

Acculturation and invasion: the acculturation of countries to others is represented as a violation/rape of part of the country that acculturated to the other. Invasions are portrayed as rapes or captures of one another.

Historical Loves: Countries and nations usually have one or two historical loves of their respective place. The so-called Historical Loves are feelings of attachment or admiration felt by countries by people who meant a great change or were relevant to themselves. Great historical personages are those who usually feel strong feelings that transcend the times. Countries never feel anything for people individually, only collectively, but when people appear that will significantly change the nation, they can feel all that, like someone who admires the beauty of a flower that despite being equal to all there is something that attracts unmistakably. The great example of a historical love is that of France and Joan of Arc.

Apogees: also called "Golden Times or the Golden Age of a Nation". However the long of the life of a country with all its good times has been, each one has its apogee or golden years. Countries refer to this as their goal in life, for which they were born. When this ends, the countries continue, although they will always wanted to return to those times. Examples of this are England and the Victorian Era, or Russia and the Soviet Era.

Infatuation, Romances and Brotherhood: countries can fall in love, and this leads to when one admires another for a big way and longs to have contact with that one. But this does not mean that there is a good deal between the two, or that they really harbor love for each other. In fact, countries may love each other, either by cultural exchange or a strong brotherhood between them for a long time, or have some enemy in common, but in the end there is no true and pure love between countries, because if the brotherhood or love they hold means to leave injured or not to provide benefits, both countries or the most disadvantaged will abandon friendship and love without hesitation by not getting favored. Of course they can feel guilty or sadness, but they will never risk without benefiting. Even friendships, which serve the trade or culture, can easily be broken regardless of the duration and good relationship of the same, if their interests are not favored or represent a risk.

Few are the countries that love or help others unconditionally. But all this does not mean that they have bad nature in a conscious way, this kind of love is what they consider to be true and is the only way they understand to relate to each other.

 _Others Terms:_

Politics: the politics of each one represents theirs way of thinking and is rooted in traits of theis personality and their actions.

Economy: Economy is its life force. It refers to theirs health.

Social: the social is the representation of their way of seeing and organizing according to each one, showing their true ways of being.

* * *

 **Well, there it is. I have to say that I still don't use this well enough, so don´t kill me!**

 **Also, I don´t write or speak English very well, so I accept corrections. Bye!**


End file.
